IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/nhhfms/2009_009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Revenue and Welfare Dominance of Ad Valorem Taxes in Two-Sided Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Kind, Hans Jarle

    () (Dept. of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration)

  • Koethenbuerger, Marko

    () (Department of Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Schjelderup, Guttorm

    () (Dept. of Finance and Management Science, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration)

Abstract

A benchmark result in public economics is that it is possible to increase both tax revenue and welfare by making a monopoly subject to ad valorem taxes rather than unit taxes. We show that such revenue and welfare dominance does not hold in two-sided markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Kind, Hans Jarle & Koethenbuerger, Marko & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2009. "On Revenue and Welfare Dominance of Ad Valorem Taxes in Two-Sided Markets," Discussion Papers 2009/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:nhhfms:2009_009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/163976
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2014. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 10.
    2. Kind, Hans Jarle & Koethenbuerger, Marko & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2008. "Efficiency enhancing taxation in two-sided markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1531-1539, June.
    3. Evans David S., 2003. "Some Empirical Aspects of Multi-sided Platform Industries," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-19, September.
    4. repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:3:p:645-667 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. D. B. Suits & R. A. Musgrave, 1953. "Ad Valorem and Unit Taxes Compared," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 598-604.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laszlo Goerke & Frederik Herzberg & Thorsten Upmann, 2014. "Failure of ad valorem and specific tax equivalence under uncertainty," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 10(4), pages 387-402, December.
    2. Paul Belleflamme & Eric Toulemonde, 2016. "Tax Incidence on Competing Two-Sided Platforms: Lucky Break or Double Jeopardy," CESifo Working Paper Series 5882, CESifo Group Munich.
    3. Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2016. "Indirect Taxes in the Cross-border Shopping Model: A Monopolistic Competition Approach," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1014, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    4. Valido, Jorge & Pilar Socorro, M. & Hernández, Aday & Betancor, Ofelia, 2014. "Air transport subsidies for resident passengers when carriers have market power," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 388-399.
    5. Laszlo Goerke, 2012. "The Optimal Structure of Commodity Taxation in a Monopoly with Tax Avoidance or Evasion," Public Finance Review, , vol. 40(4), pages 519-536, July.
    6. Aiura, Hiroshi & Ogawa, Hikaru, 2013. "Unit tax versus ad valorem tax: A tax competition model with cross-border shopping," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 30-38.
    7. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    8. Aloui, Chokri & Jebsi, Khaïreddine, 2016. "Platform optimal capacity sharing: Willing to pay more does not guarantee a larger capacity share," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 276-288.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ad Valorem Taxes; Unit Taxes; Two-Sided Markets; Revenue-Dominance; Welfare-Dominance; Monopoly;

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:nhhfms:2009_009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Stein Fossen). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dfnhhno.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.